<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[But it&#x27;s only about a 7.5+ in quality?Anybody have Sands of Kalahari on a decent full screen?  Email me at billnbeth96@y]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Sands of the Kalahari</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>MovieHobbit</strong> — <em>18 years ago(May 04, 2007 07:05 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">But it's only about a 7.5+ in quality?Anybody have Sands of Kalahari on a decent full screen?  Email me at <a href="mailto:billnbeth96@yahoo.com" rel="nofollow ugc">billnbeth96@yahoo.com</a></p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181283/but-it-s-only-about-a-7-5-in-quality-anybody-have-sands-of-kalahari-on-a-decent-full-screen-email-me-at-billnbeth96-y</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 17 May 2026 07:24:15 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181283.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:10 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to But it&#x27;s only about a 7.5+ in quality?Anybody have Sands of Kalahari on a decent full screen?  Email me at billnbeth96@y on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:13 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>LorqVonRay1999</strong> — <em>6 months ago(September 02, 2025 11:52 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Just watched the blu ray and it is a spectacular looking film.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522050</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522050</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:13 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to But it&#x27;s only about a 7.5+ in quality?Anybody have Sands of Kalahari on a decent full screen?  Email me at billnbeth96@y on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:12 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>MovieHobbit</strong> — <em>18 years ago(May 15, 2007 06:48 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">It would be interesting to see your full screen, compared to my widescreen.  Are you interested in trading or I can purchase if reasonable. Let me know at <a href="mailto:billnbeth96@yahoo.com" rel="nofollow ugc">billnbeth96@yahoo.com</a></p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522049</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522049</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:12 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to But it&#x27;s only about a 7.5+ in quality?Anybody have Sands of Kalahari on a decent full screen?  Email me at billnbeth96@y on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:11 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>babatjie</strong> — <em>18 years ago(May 07, 2007 07:48 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I have a fullscreen copy, which I would rate at 8.5. But whoever made it (and sold it to me on eBay as a DVD), clearly taped it with high-quality equipment rrom A&amp;E (the logo appears in the corner from time to time, and the ghost of a last frame of a commercial is visible in a couple of spots). While the image quality is surprisingly good, I fear there were extensive cuts for TV. It is only about 95 minutes, and the "attempted rape" scene referred to in comments does not appear.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522048</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1522048</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:26:11 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>